Some constructors of the ``++ArgumentException++``, ``++ArgumentNullException++``, ``++ArgumentOutOfRangeException++`` and ``++DuplicateWaitObjectException++`` classes must be fed with a valid parameter name. This rule raises an issue in two cases:
* When this parameter name doesn't match any existing ones.
* When a call is made to the default (parameterless) constructor
== Noncompliant Code Example
----
public void Foo(Bar a, int[] b)
{
throw new ArgumentException(); // Noncompliant
throw new ArgumentException("My error message", "c"); // Noncompliant
throw new ArgumentException("My error message", "c", innerException); // Noncompliant
throw new ArgumentNullException("c"); // Noncompliant
throw new ArgumentNullException("My error message","c"); // Noncompliant
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("c");
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("c", "My error message"); // Noncompliant
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("c",b,"My error message"); // Noncompliant
throw new DuplicateWaitObjectException("c", "My error message"); // Noncompliant
}
----
== Compliant Solution
----
public void Foo(Bar a, Bar b)
{
throw new ArgumentException("My error message", "a");
throw new ArgumentException("My error message", "b", innerException);
throw new ArgumentNullException("a");
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(a));
throw new ArgumentNullException("a", "My error message");
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("b");
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("b", "My error message");
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("b",b,"My error message");
throw new DuplicateWaitObjectException("b", "My error message");
}
----
== Exceptions
The rule won't raise an issue if the parameter name is not a constant value (inline declaration, nameof() or const variable).
